Jerome hits the nail on the head, no one list will please everyone. We had that in mind when we (the Threat Agent Analysis team @ Intel) sat down to develop our
list of motivations. We spent nearly a year researching prior art, including many of the lists mentioned here, trying to find the sweet spot: enough but not too much, coverage for every condition but not an endless list. For us, the list we provided has
worked very well and we have yet to find an instance where it did not cover what was needed, and it has resonated well both within and outside the security teams. There will probably be some individual cases not included, but we recognize a list of manageable
size will probably have outliers.
For example, Bret’s suggestions easily fit into the current taxonomy:
1. amusement -> Personal Satisfaction
2. advantage (competitive, political, economic) -> Organizational Gain or Personal Gain, depending on the actor
3. anarchy -> Dominance
Tim
From: cti@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:cti@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Jerome Athias
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2016 1:34 AM
To: Patrick Maroney <Pmaroney@specere.org>
Cc: Jordan, Bret <bret.jordan@bluecoat.com>; cti@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [cti] Attack Motivations
I concur strongly
Some common taxonomies and enumerations were captured here
My experience of developing softwares (for 15+ years) using enumerations in combo lists, etc. in a domain like cybersecurity let me think here that exhaustive "cover them all and please everybody" enumerations can't be found.
An approach using a hierarchical categorization/classification (I.e. Multi steps for 1) select a general category - mandatory 2) select a more detailed category between the ones of 1) - optional) helps ensuring a minimum of coherence without
"giving headaches" to those who hate (being specific) spending more than 5s finding The value in a list.
E.g.: views in CWE, CAPEC
On Sunday, 7 August 2016, Patrick Maroney <Pmaroney@specere.org> wrote:
I know we are on a tight timelime and want to close on these enumerations. However, I want to add a strategically focused comment here: The overarching point is to advocate for common adoption of taxonomies across standards (formal and
de facto). By taking the time to identify and adopt "best of breed" taxonomies, we can then srategically do outreach and advocate for homogenization and drive convergence. So presuming we will always have a variety of CTI schemas and ontologies (e.g., VERIS,
OpenIOC, CIF), the convergence and adoption of shared Taxonomies will empower easier transformations between different formats and internal data representations.
If we could get all CTI TC members to submit their existing taxonomies for the categories in question, maybe we could quickly reach concurrence and homogenization. Thoughts?
I know I've seen some very good Motivation Taxonomies with good descriptions. Have not found "the" one
yet...@Jerome Athias: Your thoughts?
Alternatively, here's some of the better ones I've found today.
(1) The IBM X-Force taxonomy
(We would have to normalize their "Outrage Trolls" Class).
NA: Not Applicable (unintentional action)
Espionage: Espionage or competitive advantage
Financial: Financial or personal gain
Fun: Fun, curiosity, or pride
Grudge: Grudge or personal offense
Ideology: Ideology or protest
Convenience: Convenience of expediency
Patrick Maroney
President
Integrated Networking Technologies, Inc.
Desk: (856)983-0001
Cell: (609)841-5104
Email:
pmaroney@specere.org
Couldn't find one but believe a taxonomy exists
This Taxonomy did come from an existing well vetted solution. aka the Intel Threat Agent work. But given that work applies to general threat actors, we are trying I tailor it more specifically to the cyber space.
The reason I am looking to add a few values is I have been reviewing every taxonomy I can find and make sure our terms and definitions cover everything that cerebrally exists.
Bret
Sent from my Commodore 64
.02: Like Sophistication, we should directly adopt an existing, well vetted, Taxonomy.
@Patrick/ISightPartners or @EclecticIQ: Can you provide reference?
Patrick Maroney
President
Integrated Networking Technologies, Inc.
Desk: (856)983-0001
Cell: (609)841-5104
Email:
pmaroney@specere.org
All,
Intrusion Sets and Threat Actors both use the Attack Motivations vocabulary. Right now we have the following terms in that vocab:
-
accidental
-
coercion
-
dominance
-
ideology
-
notoriety
-
organizational-gain
-
personal-gain
-
personal-satisfaction
-
revenge
-
unpredictable
I propose that we add the following thee terms to this list, I missed them when I was putting this list together.
-
amusement
-
advantage (competitive, political, economic)
-
anarchy
Bret Jordan CISSP
Director of Security Architecture and Standards | Office of the CTO
PGP Fingerprint: 63B4 FC53 680A 6B7D 1447 F2C0 74F8 ACAE 7415 0050
"Without cryptography vihv vivc ce xhrnrw, however, the only thing that can not be unscrambled is an egg."